❓ Question regarding the buffer zone between a residential development and a former waste disposal facility, focusing on radiological safety and responsibility for maintaining the buffer. The answer deflects some responsibility to other departments and cites confidentiality.
AnsweredQoN 2091Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to a letter from the Radiological Council to Department of Water and Environmental Regulation on 24 July 2018, entitled Greenpatch Residential Development, Adjacent Former Cristal Pigment Dalyellup Waste Disposal Facility, tabled by the Minister for Environment on 4 December, and I ask: (a) is the reserve boundary is situated within the boundaries of the Greenpatch or within the boundaries of the Waste Residue Disposal Facility; (b) will the Minister provide an exact map with coordinates delineating the reserve boundary; (c) if no to (b), why not; (d) who provided the information to the Radiological Council about a buffer being unnecessary beyond the reserve boundary; (e) will the Minister table the advice; (f) if no to (e), why not; (g) what does the Radiological Council define as 'an adequate internal buffer between the disposal cells and the reserve boundary' to be; (h) will the Minister table a map or advise coordinates of the current internal buffer zone between the disposal cells and the reserve boundary; (i) if no to (h), why not; and (j) who is responsible for ensuring the internal buffer is maintained between disposal cells and the reserve boundary?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
6 June 2019
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Health
Response time
12 days
I am advised:
(a) The letter references the reserve boundary as that of the waste disposal facility itself.
(b) No.
(c) This information should be obtained through the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage.
(d) A radiation consultant employed by an environmental consulting firm provided advice to the Radiological Council that there was no scientific basis for a buffer.
(e) No.
(f) The information cannot be disclosed under Section 49 of the Radiation Safety Act.
(g) The disposal cells are a minimum of 15-20m from the reserve boundary, which is considered to be a more than adequate set back.
(h) Refer to answer (b).
(i) Refer to answer (c).
(j) This is achieved through a relevant memorial on property title under the Contaminated Sites Act 2003 .
(a) The letter references the reserve boundary as that of the waste disposal facility itself.
(b) No.
(c) This information should be obtained through the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage.
(d) A radiation consultant employed by an environmental consulting firm provided advice to the Radiological Council that there was no scientific basis for a buffer.
(e) No.
(f) The information cannot be disclosed under Section 49 of the Radiation Safety Act.
(g) The disposal cells are a minimum of 15-20m from the reserve boundary, which is considered to be a more than adequate set back.
(h) Refer to answer (b).
(i) Refer to answer (c).
(j) This is achieved through a relevant memorial on property title under the Contaminated Sites Act 2003 .
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.